Sep 23 2013

Print this Post

Judge Says OK Lawsuit Against Illegal ObamaCare IRS Rule Can Proceed


A note from Joan: I wanted to let GiM members and readers know about the article, below, as the subject it covers is getting very little media coverage. People need to know about this IRS rule, why it’s illegal, and that states have standing to challenge it. The author of the article is Shelli Dawdy, founder of Grassroots in Nebraska (GiN), our sister group.

health care law litigation irs rule graphic

On August 11, 2013, a federal judge ruled that the State of Oklahoma has standing to proceed with a lawsuit challenging an Internal Revenue Service rule issued in May 2012 regarding premium subsidies in the form of tax credits and penalties delivered through the Affordable Care Act’s insurance exchange provisions. Oklahoma’s Attorney General Scott Pruitt amended pleadings filed in 2011 1 to include challenges to that IRS rule.

Oklahoma’s filing asserts that the IRS rule is illegal because it delivers tax credits and penalties without statutory authority, specifically, that the health care law does not provide for tax credits or penalties in the language pertaining to federal insurance exchanges.

I’m not alone in my belief that the Oklahoma lawsuit has merit and that a legal victory on the issue could force Congress to readdress the entire issue of “health care reform” from scratch. Already-scanty news reports on the subject of “ObamaCare” seem curiously devoid of information, about either the existence of Oklahoma’s court case or the August 11 federal court ruling. Considering the growing number of Americans opposed to the health care law and that the case involves the IRS – an object of regular scandal reports since May of this year – the lack of reporting should at least raise eyebrows. And not just about the media. If elected officials who’ve repeatedly proclaimed their opposition to the law would make the IRS rule an issue, then it would be reported. So, to ask the obvious: Why aren’t those “ObamaCare fighters” shouting this news from the rooftops? And, more importantly, why is Oklahoma’s Attorney General the only state official taking action?

Read the rest of the article on the Grassroots in Nebraska site:

Click to read the full article on the Grassroots in Nebraska (GiN) website

Click to read the full article on the Grassroots in Nebraska (GiN) website


  1. In the original lawsuit filed by the State of Oklahoma, it asserted that the individual mandate was in conflict with Article 2, Section 37 of it’s Constitution and that the individual mandate was an unconstitutional exercise of Congress’ Commerce Clause and Necessary and Proper Clause powers.

Permanent link to this article: http://grassrootsmichigan.com/?p=3620

Leave a Reply